User talk:Frank C. Müller

Return to "Frank C. Müller" page.
Look also at

Category:People looking leftEdit

Hallo Frank C. Müller, die abgebildeten Personen der Dateien File:AntoinetteMiggiani.jpg und File:Cornelia Froboess.jpg schauen in die entgegengesetzte Richtung wie die anderen Bilder in der Category:People looking left. War das so beabsichtigt? (Vielleicht interessiert dich in dem Zusammenhang auch Category talk:Looking right) --Diwas (talk) 20:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


Hallo Diwas! Das war keine Absicht. Vielen Dank für den Hinweis! gruß, fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 06:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Black and white photographsEdit

Hello. I think this edit was not needed, since the image was already in "Category:Black and white photographs of families", which is a subcategory of the category you added. I therefore removed the addition. Thank you for your work. Cheers, -- 18:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


Hello Infrogmation!

The description in Category:Black and white photographs says: "The category should be applied to in addition to any topical (sub-) categories." So I guess, this is an exeption from the non-overcategorization-rule.

Regards fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 19:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, thank you. I don't understand why this needs to be used contrary to the rules of other categories; I have asked at Category talk:Black and white photographs. Cheers, Infrogmation (talk) 00:11, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


Category:Animals facing leftEdit

Category discussion notification Category:Animals facing left has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Category:Animals facing rightEdit

Category discussion notification Category:Animals facing right has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

- MPF (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

VandalismEdit

IF I make a Category, that have a meaning, do not remove important information!haabet 16:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


Sorry, but You created the category at 2010-05-16T18:15:23, two days after adding this category to several pictures and after I had removed this category from some of these pictures. So, that's no vandalism! Regards fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 16:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Watermark tagsEdit

Hi Frank, I noticed you added Category:Images with watermarks to File:Dinizulu.jpg. This is a cleanup category and User:Martin H. seems to think that the photographer company should not be removed from this photo - generally it's a good idea to avoid putting watermark tags on images where the watermark was not recently added, without explanation. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 18:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi Dcoetzee!

Ok, thanks for the hint. But what do you mean with "avoid putting watermark tags on images where the watermark was not recently added, without explanation"? May I put a watermark tag, if the watermark was recently added, or if the watermark was added with an explanation? The text of the category says: "watermarks or credits in the image itself" (in german: "Wasserzeichen oder Quellenangaben im Bild selbst"). Perhaps you or someone else may specify the text of the category to clarify a bit more what is meant and what not.

Regards, fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 06:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unclear - there's some debate over whether captions or signatures should be removed from works when those captions or signatures were added a long time ago (the markings themselves may have historic value). Maybe the best solution is to upload under a different name. It's not your fault, I should have been more careful. :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 08:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I think, now I've got it! So long, fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 09:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

BonjourEdit

En effet, je souhaite la suppression des images que j'ai importées dans la mesure ou elles ne sont pas les miennes. C'est dans ce but que j'ai retiré des informations. J'en avais d'ailleurs parlé à User:Jean-Frédéric, sans succès. Je ne connait pas la procédure pour supprimer ces images. Peut-etre pourriez-vous m'aider? Merci --Toubabmaster (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


Ok. D'abord je vais transférer cette réponse a ta page de discussion, parceque c'est le bon usage ici, dans le monde wiki, de répondre au lieu, ou une discussion a étée commencée, pour tenir ensemble le fil de discussion. Et puis le reste là. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 15:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image PromotionEdit

Spitzmaulnashorn fcm.jpg
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Spitzmaulnashorn fcm.jpg, which was produced or nominated by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates‎.

Auf die Idee einerEdit

Category:Blue sky bin ich - warum auch immer - nicht gekommen. Danke fürs Umräumen. Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Danke für das Danke. Du bist aber auch ein fleißiger Hochlader! gruß, fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 12:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Please give images better namesEdit

Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | മലയാളം | македонски | Nederlands | polski | português | русский | +/−


I noticed you've uploaded File:HD-SC-98-07558_Ausschnitt_fcm.jpg and I thought I should draw your attention to a common error.

Please give uploaded images meaningful names. Otherwise they are difficult to track and it is hard to tell what the image is about without actually looking at it. I suggest you rename your image with an intuitive name that describes the image itself. Thanks, and happy editing!

This is just an information. New name might be File:Samuel Kanyon Doe - Liberian.jpg. Renaming will be carried out by a filemover. No action at your side is required. Thank you. RE rillke questions? 13:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Bierdeckel_Fischer_fcm.jpgEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bierdeckel_Fischer_fcm.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Leyo 18:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Eppelborn 09 fcm.jpgEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Eppelborn 09 fcm.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Vera (talk) 21:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Economy_by_cityEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Economy_by_city has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Mjrmtg (talk) 14:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

closeupEdit

Guten Abend, File:Bombylius major - Burgenland.jpg, File:Episyrphus balteatus - botanischer Garten Schönbrunn 2.jpg und einige andere sind definitiv keine Closeups, diese Kategorie wurde, seitdem sie mit Makroaufnahmen vereinigt wurde, sinnbefreit. LG., --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


Hallo Spacebirdy!

  • Wie definierst Du denn Close-ups?
  • Meinst Du mit "Makroaufnahmen " die Kategorie "Macro photographs", die der Kategorie "Close-ups" untergeordnet ist?
  • Was meinst Du mit "sinnbefreit"?

gruß, fcm, --Frank C. Müller (talk) 10:38, 28 December 2013 (UTC) (ich hatte die Unterschrift vergessen!)

Nicht ich definiere das. Es gibt eine Definition, was Makroaufnahmen sind, und diese fallen sicher darunter (bzw. ersteres schon Mikrofotografie)... einfach alles mit Nahaufnahmen (Closeups) zusammenzuwuerfeln ist komplett unsinnig, da Makros (wie z.B. das zweite) nicht notwendigerweise Nahaufnahmen sind! Das zweite zeigt das komplette Tier, das ist also keine Nahaufnahme. --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 00:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hallo tototl!

Ich höre aus Deinen Äußerungen zwei Kritiken heraus:

  • Aufnahmen des ganzen Objekts sind keine Close-Ups, die fangen erst da an, wo nur noch Teile des Objektes (ab etwa der Hälfte) zu sehen sind.
Dem kann ich mich anpassen, kein Problem!
  • Macro photographs sind keine Close-ups. Makrophotographie ist eine technische Dimension (es geht um den Abbildungsmaßstab); beim Closeup geht es darum, was man auf der Aufnahme sieht: Sieht man auf dem Bild nur einen Pferdekopf, ist das ein Closeup, aber kein Makro; sieht man auf dem Bild nur ein ganzes Insekt, ist das (wahrscheinlich) ein Makro, aber kein Closeup.
Wenn das Deine Meinung wiedergibt, kann ich Dir nur zustimmen. Wie Du aber leicht nachprüfen kannst, habe nicht ich die Makros den Closeups zugeordnet, sondern die User Pierpao und Foroa; User ComputerHotline hat das auch schon einmal versucht, rückgängig zu machen. Wenn Du einverstanden bist, kann ich versuchen, die Zuordnung noch einmal rückgängig zu machen und das auf der Diskussionsseite der Kategorie erläutern.

gruß, fcm. --Frank C. Müller (talk) 15:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Das waere fein. Der Kritikpunkt die Kategorie Closeup in Makroaufnahmen einzufuegen bleibt jedoch bestehen ;o) LG., --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 15:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

So, ich hab die Macro photographs wieder aus den Close-ups rausgenommen und das auch in der Diskussion begründet.

--Frank C. Müller (talk) 18:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Interrobang fcm.pngEdit

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Interrobang fcm.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Mahir256 (talk) 23:58, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Last modified on 25 January 2014, at 23:58